[gruez]

>impersonate Firefox 95

you should really be impersonating an ESR version (eg. 91). Versions from the release channel is updated every month or so, and everyone has autoupdate enabled. Therefore unless you keep it up to date, your fingerprint is going to stick out like a sore thumb in a few months. On the other hand, ESR sticks to one version and shouldn't change significantly during its one year lifetime. It's still going to stick out to some extent (most people don't use ESR), but at least you have some enterprises who use ESR to blend into.

[kalleboo]

They should really be impersonating Chrome. If this takes off, Firefox has such a small user share that I could see sites just banning Firefox altogether, like they do with Tor

[jve]

I suspect Tor is being banned not because of a small user share.

Perhaps you may get broken sites with Firefox, because no-one cared. But banning? Seems like a stretch.

[kalleboo]

Tor is banned (or rather, tar-pitted in endless CAPTCHAs) because the amount of legit users is massively dwarfed by the abuse

If everyone running scrapers and attack probes start showing up as Firefox, then they'll end up in the same situation.

[oefrha]

If there are a lot of abuse masquerading as Firefox, outstripping legit users, they can totally throw up a CAPTCHA for Firefox but not for Chrome. An outright ban isn’t the only annoying outcome.

[lwthiker]

Thanks for the suggestion, I had no idea ESR was a thing. I've just added support for Firefox ESR 91 (it was pretty similar and required adding one cipher to the cipher list and changing the user agent).

[LanternLight83]

I think ESR is the way to go too, but either way, I wonder if some tests can be written to confirm the coverage/similarity of the requests? It would entail automating a both Firefox session and the recording of network traffic, and feels like it might end up as bikeshedding.